[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: sid on openvz



On 2015-12-03 17:33, James Cloos wrote:
> The latest glibc update breaks most sid installs on (typically leased)
> openvz platforms because it requires a newer kernel version that most
> openvz vendors advertize.
> 
> Most openvz run on kernels based on 2.6.32, often with significant
> updates.  These platforms are an important segment, given how affordable
> they are.  And Debian "stable" is often too archaic for many needs which
> fit nicely on a small inexpensive server.

If you consider Debian "stable" as too archaic, I am missing words to
qualify a 2.6.32 kernel released in 2009. Prehistoric maybe?

> There should be a way to continue to use sid on these platforms.
> 
> Adding a hold on libc6 only causes other problems, since so much now
> depends on 2.21 and apt will drop them if libc6 is held on 2.19.
> 
> Is there another option to avoid the breakage?

One solution is to use jessie plus backports. This will be supported up
to at least May 2018, probably May 2020.

The minimum required version in the glibc is something configurable at
build time (to some extents, the absolute minimum is 2.6.32 for glibc
2.21). This configure how much compatibility glue is used to workaround
the missing syscalls. This compatibility glue is bloating the libc, and
usually also have bugs which triggers for old kernels, but also
sometimes for new kernels. For example recently someone wanted to push
the minimum version to 3.15 to fix an issue with pthread_cond_broadcast
on ARM.

That's the reason why historically we have always required for a glibc
from release N, at least the kernel from release N-2. This means for
stretch, the kernel from wheezy, ie 3.2. Supporting bleeding edge
software with an archaic kernel is not something easy to do, and other
parts of the distribution simply don't, especially since the switch to
systemd.

Aurelien

-- 
Aurelien Jarno                          GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B
aurelien@aurel32.net                 http://www.aurel32.net


Reply to: